[FLSA-2005:2336] Updated kernel packages fix security issues

[Jim Popovitch]

On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 15:43 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:

> True.  What I said was a little harsh.  Reality is that things that
> really are serious decisions do get ran through the mail lists.

Some of my comments were probably overly harsh.  In an effort get
something positive out of this discussion, let me continue with why it
is difficult for me to contribute more.  

Let's take "mc" as an issue.  I use Midnight Commander, and I see there
is some chatter about it in Bugzilla.  So, I go to bugzilla and search
for it it.... hmmm, 4 hits.  Which is the one that I should spend time
with?  Ok, so I pick one, looks like there isn't really a good consensus
from the deep level guys as to what to fix... this means there is
nothing for me to test.  Ok, so I wait.  Days pass.  Oh, looks like
there are now some pkgs to d/l and test.  What to test?  Where is the
details on what should be tested... go read CAN reports.   OK, now I
think I know what was broke, where do I go to determine what was fixed
so that I know what to test?   Oh well, I give up and just test the
stuff that I use in mc.   Great, all works (afaik), sha1sum and post a
VERIFY.  More days pass, more deep level comments about more mc issues
needing resolution.  The result: all the time I spent was a waste.

The FL process is painful, difficult, and makes people question whether
or not they even want to be involved. 

-Jim P.